Re: Formatting Objects considered harmful

[Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx]

Hi Simon.

I did read your entire post. My full apologise if I infered, or assumed
that which wasn't inteded.

Just to make sure I have you straight then. When your say...

<quote>
I made no argument that XSL is unnecessary; I made the argument that the
tools CSS provides don't offer any temptations - your semantic firewall -
that are built into even a simple implementation of XSL.
</quote>

1. Are you commiting to the arguement that use of a "semantic firewall" is
a "bad thing" and that the W3C should take steps to stop such a practice?

2. Are you suggesting that the W3C should impede what you have previously
stated to be a sound business case?

3. Are you suggesting that the W3C should take steps to discourage large
corporates from placing their data on the Web?

Personaly I would argue that...

1. the ability to create a semantic firewall is a "good thing" if the
implimentor feels it necessary to actualise the product requirements of
their application, and that the W3C should not seek to stop such a
practice.

2. The W3C should actively seek to facilitate sound business cases on the
Web.

3. The W3C should facilitate large corporates in making their data
available on the Web.

Cheers

     Guy.







xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 04/28/99 07:52:00 PM

To:   xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:    (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID)
Subject:  Re: Formatting Objects considered harmful




At 03:43 PM 4/28/99 +0100, you wrote:
>I appreciate that your documents are of a simple form, and are in fact
>documents. So the simple solution is as you point out is don't transform.
>
>You must however be aware that rendering from simple documents is the
>smallest portion of the challenges that face the Web designer and
>developer, whether constructing the framework for a large website or web
>app, or aggregating data for delivery as a document.
I made no argument that XSL is unnecessary; I made the argument that the
tools CSS provides don't offer any temptations - your semantic firewall -
that are built into even a simple implementation of XSL.
>It has been said many times in the past, that XSL is not seeking to
replace
>CSS (or indeed XHTML), but is being designed to meet the needs of problem
>domains for which XHTML+CSS are not up to the task for. These domains are
>not just specialist printing requirements, but any large complex and
>interactive Web presentation.
That wasn't my argument.
>In short, nobody is forcing you to use XSL, you already have XML+CSS. And
>correspondingly, please don't try and insist that XML+CSS are enough for
my
>needs :)
If you'd actually read the entire message, you might have noticed that that
wasn't what I was saying.
Simon St.Laurent
XML: A Primer
Sharing Bandwidth / Cookies
http://www.simonstl.com

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list






 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list